text:
Tag Archives: forgiveness
Tomorrow, Maybe
Father doesn't always know best.
(2017) Drama (Random Media) Robert Blanche, Bethany Jacobs, Grant Davis, Brian Sutherland, Robert McKeehan, Garfield Wedderburn, Erin Hagen, Pamela O'Hare, Kyle Vahan, Todd A. Robinson, John Branch, Roy Frank Kirk 1st, Jeffrey Arrington, Jace Daniel, Alysse Fozmark. Directed by Jace Daniel
Making amends is no easy thing. It is, first and foremost, an admission of wrongdoing, taking ownership of mistreatment. Taking ownership of our less proud moments is difficult even for the saintliest among us. The hardest part, however, is often getting those we have wrong to allow us to make amends in the first place.
Lloyd (Blanche) has just been released from prison and is a changed man He realizes full well that he has wasted most of his life to petty criminality and drug abuse. The relationship with his daughter Iris (Jacobs) is certainly strained; he essentially abandoned her early on and she has been disappointed by him again and again and again, ad nauseam.
Lloyd is looking to leave his past behind him and start a new life on the straight and narrow. In so doing, he hopes to get a second chance with his daughter and become a part of her life. She is understandably reluctant to trust her dad but gradually his sincerity begins to win her over.
He's picked a pretty good time to return to her life; her husband Bobby (Davis), a cop, has developed a savage drinking problem and is spiraling out of control. He has begun to get violent and Iris doesn't know what to do about it. Lloyd wants to help salvage things with her husband but things get so bad that Iris kicks Bobby to the curb. Bobby is growing more irrational by the day and blames Lloyd for the issues between him and Iris, believing that Lloyd is turning his daughter against him. The three are on a collision course with tragedy if they're not careful.
Actually, the film is essentially told in flashback form with audiences being told somewhat of the crowning incident which I will not spoil here even though the filmmakers sort of do. That's a bit of a tactical error; the director/writer Daniel is trying to pull off a twist in the plot but I think it would have been more effective if we didn't have an inkling of what all this was leading to.
Otherwise, the movie gets kudos for tackling domestic abuse in a realistic way as well as the issues of making amends. Yeah, at times the film goes for easy answers rather than slogging through some rough emotional terrain while at other times Daniel seems quite willing to do that. Those moments tend to be the highlights of the film.
The three leads need to deliver powerhouse performances and they aren't quite up to the task. Blanche fares best, giving Lloyd a rough-hewn charm, a man clearly reaching out and a bit confused by the vagaries of life. It's hard not to root for him and while we clearly understand that his difficulties are largely his own doing, you end up hoping his daughter will give him that chance he so desperately desires.
Jacobs is less successful but truth be told is given less to work with, even though she's the emotional center of the film. As a woman who has been consistently let down by the men in her life both as a child and as an adult, there is a wariness and a weariness to her manner but at times Jacobs is a bit flat in her line delivery. Davis is a little bit in the middle although it is essentially a thankless role; Bobby turns out to be a fairly irredeemable a-hole so even when we learn the source of his pain, his rage and his drinking, there's not a lot of sympathy there.
The movie's tiny budget is evident; often the scenes are underlit or might have used a few more takes. Still, as independent dramas go this one isn't bad. It's not Oscar material by a long stretch but it at least has a certain amount of ambition and seems to have at least honest intentions. Not all indie films can claim that.
REASONS TO SEE: Blanche gives a solid performance.
REASONS TO AVOID: Has a tendency to go for easy answers.
FAMILY VALUES: There is a fair amount of profanity, some violence and a scene of sexuality.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: The three leads all at one time or another appeared in the TV series Grimm.
BEYOND THE THEATER: Amazon, Fandango Now, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube
CRITICAL MASS: As of 8/26/19: Rotten Tomatoes: No score yet: Metacritic: No score yet.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Sleeping With the Enemy
NEXT: The Peanut Butter Falcon
Posted in VOD Review	| Tagged abandonment issues, alcoholism, amends, bar fight, Bethany Jacobs, cinema, Cinema365, dishwasher, domestic violence, Drama, ex-con, Films, forgiveness, Grant Davis, latent homosexuality, Los Angeles, movies, Random Media, Robert Blanche, straight and narrow, Tomorrow Maybe, VOD Reviews	| Leave a reply
The Family I Had
An estranged mother and daughter face an uncertain future.
(2017) Documentary (Discovery/Smoke & Apple) Charity Lee, Ella, Paris, Becca, Kyla, Chaplain Donna, Khyman, Phoenix. Directed by Katie Green and Carlye Rubin
Certain things are just unthinkable. They aren't possibilities most people ever have to consider. When we encounter them (generally in a news story or documentary) we are shocked and often we attempt to put ourselves in the shoes of those victimized. However, try as we might, we just can't do it.
Charity Lee was working in a bar and grill one rainy Super Bowl Sunday near her home in Abilene, Texas when the police come to the bar and she is summoned to the manager's office. Her little four-year-old girl Ella has been hurt. When she tries to get details, eventually the police admit that her baby is dead.
But that isn't even the worst part; her son Paris, then 13 years old, murdered his little sister – strangling her and stabbing her 17 times with a kitchen knife. On the 911 call he sounds panicked and upset. He claims that he was hallucinating and thought that Ella was a demon.
How does one forgive a crime like that? If it is a stranger who committed the crime, it's a bit easier I would imagine but when it's your own flesh and blood – the son you carried for nine months, the boy who gave your life meaning and purpose – how do you forgive them when he takes your little baby away? Do you write him off, abandon him? Could you even try?
These are the impossible choices facing Charity and the filmmakers pull no punches but over the course of the 77 minute documentary they slowly reveal the other elements of the puzzle; Charity is a recovering heroin addict, her short-cropped hair and tattooed body proclaiming her intention to live outside the norm. We are introduced to Kyla, Charity's mom from whom Charity has been estranged for years, even before the murder. It turns out that Kyla has some skeletons of her own in the closet including a whopper you won't see coming. The apple may not fall very far from the tree after all.
I think this is one of those documentaries that is better viewed knowing as little as possible about the film when watching it. The revelations here aren't "gotcha" moments by any means and while it may seem that there is a random element to how things are revealed, upon reflection I don't think that's the case as all. Green and Rubin unfold the story very much as you might hear it from the people involved themselves, with bits and pieces and fragments coming out in dribs and drabs. If you were to befriend Charity, chances are she wouldn't hit you over the head with all of it at once. She would tell you about the horrific crime first and then slowly tell you other elements of the story as she gets to trust you. The storytelling, in that sense, is completely organic.
We meet Paris through a series of prison interviews and at first he comes off as a bright and fairly normal guy (he's in his early 20s now). We also begin to learn that he is anything but normal; we are shown illustrations that he draws which are cleverly brought to life through the magic of computer animation. Glimpses of the darkness inside him make themselves known as we observe the disturbing pencil drawings; revelations from Charity also tell us, shockingly, that a psychiatrist warned of Paris' potential homicidal tendencies more than a year before Ella's murder.
We also view home movies of what appears to be a loving family with Paris doting on Ella. By all accounts the two were very close, making not just the fact that Paris murdered Ella so shocking but the brutality of the act comes as even more of a surprise. Even so, Charity at one point admits that she was afraid of her son even before he took her daughter's life.
Charity has since had a third child, a beautiful little boy named Phoenix. Paris sends Phoenix letters with some fairly terrifying drawings and Charity admits that she is terrified of what Paris might do to Phoenix should Paris be released from prison which in about ten years he will be eligible to do. Charity clearly alternates between that fear and the desire to get her son the help he needs and that the Texas prison system is all too unwilling to provide. Charity is concerned and rightly so that Paris may leave the confines of the Texas penal system more of a monster than he was when he arrived.
Rubin and Green use only first names throughout the film, possibly to drive home the point that this could be any family. Certainly Charity's wild child days and her general non-conformity will raise some eyebrows, but nobody who watches her with her kids will think anything less of her than being a supremely loving mother whose eyes alone reflect the grief and strain of having had to navigate an impossible situation. Regardless of what you think of her life choices, nobody should have to suffer as she has and continues to suffer to this day.
This documentary made it's debut at the Tribeca Film Festival this past April and is currently airing on the Investigation Discovery channel but it shouldn't be too long before it is available to stream. When it does, this is one film you should keep an eye out for particularly for those who are into true crime films. This is one of the best I've seen this year.
This is a searing documentary that will not leave your memory easily. There are those who no doubt will point to Charity and her checkered past with judgmental fingers, but it's hard to do when you see how strong she is, how hard she tries and how she herself is growing and becoming better. One feels sympathy and might even wish that this woman and her family can find some sort of peace.
REASONS TO GO: A chilling look at how a seemingly normal, bright kid can be a dangerous sociopath. The dysfunctional family dynamic shown here raises some important questions. The animated drawings are nifty – but disturbing. The forgiveness can be transformational.
REASONS TO STAY: Some may find this a little too shocking and disturbing to submerge themselves into.
FAMILY VALUES: There is some profanity, drug content and violent content.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: The film is partially set in Abilene, Texas which has more churches per capita than any other city in the United States.
BEYOND THE THEATERS: Investigation Discovery
CRITICAL MASS: As of 12/22/17: Rotten Tomatoes: No score yet. Metacritic: No score yet.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: A Murder in Mansfield
NEXT: Atomic Blonde
Posted in VOD Review	| Tagged 911 call, Abilene, butterflies, cinema, Cinema365, Discovery Films, Films, forgiveness, heroin addict, homicide, hyperventilating, Investigation Discovery, juvenile, medication, movies, panic, prison interview, reconciliation, reviews, savannah, Smoke & Apple, sociopath, tattoos, Texas penal system, The Family I Had, Tribeca Film Festival, Tribeca Film Festival 2017, VOD Reviews	| Leave a reply
Two serious fellas take a walk in the woods.
(2016) True Life Drama (IFC) Timothy Spall, Colm Meaney, John Hurt, Freddie Highmore, Toby Stephens, Catherine McCormack, Ian McElhinney, Ian Beattie, Barry Ward, Kristy Robinson, Mark Lambert, Stewart David Hawthorne, Frank Cannon, John Wark, Michael Hooley, Aaron Rolph. Directed by Nick Hamm
Younger readers probably don't remember much about what the Irish with their typical gift for grim understatement refer to as "The Troubles." There was a time in Northern Ireland when the Catholics, represented by the Irish Republican Army and their political arm the Sinn Fein were in open revolt against the British-backed Protestant government. The IRA was in all senses a terrorist organization, planting bombs, assassinating political leaders and ambushing British soldiers sent to keep the peace. Belfast became a war zone. Readers over the age of 30 – particularly those in the UK – will remember these times vividly.
It is not like that any longer and while there are still some hard feelings particularly among older hardcore sorts, Ireland is at last at peace and Belfast is a wonderful place for tourists to visit rather than a place for anyone who didn't have to live there to avoid. The reason for that is that the two sides got together and decided that peace was better than pride, but in order for that to happen the leadership on both sides – represented by firebrand minister Rev. Ian Paisley (Spall) for the Unionists (the Protestant political party) and alleged former IRA coordinator turned politician Martin McGuinness (Meaney) – had to take the message to heart.
Orchestrated by British Prime Minister Tony Blair (Stephens), the two sides met at St. Andrew's in Scotland to discuss a final, lasting peace but early on the curmudgeonly Paisley informed Blair that he was going to leave for a few days to attend his 50th wedding anniversary celebration in Belfast. McGuinness, realizing that once Paisley was surrounded by hardliners in his party he would be unlikely to budge on important points to making the peace happen, invokes one of the rules of the meeting and arranges to be flown on the same plane to Ireland. However, due to storms the nearest airport in Glasgow had been socked in. There would be a chance to fly out of Edinburgh instead but they'd have to drive there quickly.
Former MI-5 director Harry Patterson (Hurt) arranges for the driver Jack (Highmore), a field operative normally, to have a hidden earpiece and for the car to have microphones and cameras all over it. The hope, shared by Republican politician Gerry Adams (Beattie) and Protestant politician Bertie Ahern (Lambert), is that the two men, who have never spoken to each other and had publicly disdained one another, would get to talking if forced to by a long car ride. All of them felt like McGuinness that once the crusty Paisley, who once declared Pope John Paul II to be the Antichrist, was in Belfast the talks would essentially collapse and the bloodshed would continue.
Essentially the whole movie is two people talking to each other with periodic interjections from Jack and occasional switches to the command center where the two are being observed. There is a prologue (which unusual for a true life drama features pictures of the actual participants rather than having the actors digitally inserted) that explains the lead up to the peace talks (and to be sure, it's very well done) and an epilogue but mainly it's just two guys talking. That can be a good thing or a bad thing but when you have two great character actors the caliber of Spall and Meaney, it's definitely the former.
While I wouldn't say necessarily that the performances here are Oscar-worthy (although Spall comes pretty close), they are super strong nonetheless. Both actors are riveting and the two have tremendous chemistry. Meaney, chiefly known for his Star Trek role as Miles O'Brien, is jocular as McGuinness, the one who truly understands the horrors of the Troubles and is quite eager to end them but knows that he won't be very popular with his own people, as Paisley won't be popular with his if they do find a way to make peace. However, he also realizes that they'll both be popular with history. Spall is stentorian as Paisley, a perpetually sour expression on his face although he is prone to a somewhat impish (and corny) sense of humor. We're used to seeing Spall portray English bulldogs; here, he portrays an Irish one.
While the actors don't really resemble their real life counterparts in the slightest, they both capture the essence of the men they're portraying, from Paisley's bombastic speaking style to McGuinness' haunted thousand-yard-stare. Neither man is with us any longer which is likely just as well; neither one would have been comfortable with the liberties taken with history here.
The former child actor Highmore is solid and likable in an adult role, while the late John Hurt is as dependable as always in a fairly small role but it is enough to remind us of what a great talent he was. Most of the rest of the cast are fine but unremarkable in their parts but Spall and Meaney get the lion's share of screen time.
Yet the filmmakers cover themselves during that prologue by boldly stating that "this story imagines that journey" which covers a lot of sins. The tale of how two sworn enemies who literally loathed what the other stood for could bury the hatchet and not only learn to work together but indeed became fast friends whose banter was so universal they became informally known as "The Chuckle Brothers" during their tenure as Ireland's number one and number two politicians.
The cinematography is beautiful as Greg Gardiner gives us lovely vistas of the Scottish countryside (although ironically some of the scenes were filmed in Ireland) and gathering storm clouds, of quaint villages and lonely country roads. It's a beautiful film to look at. Spall and Meaney are given a lovely sandbox to play in.
I'm conversant with the events of the actual peace talks rather than expert in them but from what I understand the actual story behind how Paisley and McGuinness came to become friends after being enemies is more interesting albeit less dramatic than what's portrayed here. The changing of hearts and minds tends to be a gradual thing rather than something that happens during the course of a road trip. In some ways the film cheapens the life journey that Paisley and McGuinness actually took with this imagined one but I suppose one could look at it metaphorically and find some common ground with history.
This is despite its laissez faire attitude towards facts a solid and impressive film thanks largely due to the performances. It's never a bad thing seeing great actors act well and you'll certainly see that here. One gets a sense of the depth of hatred that each side had for the other and the desperate but slender hope that they could find some common ground for peace. One thing is for certain; it was hellaciously difficult for both sides to get past their hatred and distrust for the other and learn to live in peace. If the Irish can do it, that gives us some hope that it can happen here too.
REASONS TO GO: Tremendous performances by Spall and Meaney who work very well together. The cinematography is top-notch.
REASONS TO STAY: History is fudged quite a bit and the story is oversimplified and "Hollywoodized" for the sake of unneeded dramatic tension.
FAMILY VALUES: The themes are adult and there are some violent images as well as plenty of foul language.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: The journey depicted, sadly, never actually happened. The Rev. Paisley did not fly to Belfast for his Golden Wedding anniversary as depicted for the simple reason that his wife Eileen accompanied him to St. Andrew's. McGuinness later recalled that the two didn't speak directly at the St. Andrew's Peace Talks and didn't have their first actual conversation until about six months later.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Hunger
NEXT: F(l)ag Football
Posted in New Releases	| Tagged 1990s, abandoned church, apologies, Belfast, bombings, British cinema, Catherine McCormack, chartered jet, cinema, Cinema365, Colm Meaney, Films, firebrand, forgiveness, Freddie Highmore, Gerry Adams, Golden Wedding Anniversary, graveyard, Ian McElhinney, Ian Paisley, IFC Films, IRA, Irish cinema, Irish Republican Army, John Hurt, Martin McGuinness, MI-5, movies, mutual loathing, peace talks, reviews, road trip, Scotland, Sinn Fein, St. Andrew's peace talks, The Journey, Timothy Spall, Toby Stephens, Tony Blair, true-life drama, Unionist, violence	| Leave a reply
Posted on May 3, 2014 by carlosdev
Those who walk along straight tracks are liable to get run down by a train.
(2013) True Life Drama (Weinstein) Colin Firth, Nicole Kidman, Stellan Skarsgard, Jeremy Irvine, Sam Reid, Tanroh Ishida, Hiroyuki Sanada, Bryan Probets, Michael MacKenzie, Jeffrey Daunton, Tom Stokes, Tom Hobbs, Akos Armont, Keith Fleming, Ben Aldridge, Yukata Izumihara, Masa Yamaguchi, Michael Doonan, Keiichi Enomoto. Directed by Jonathan Teplitzky
The number of veterans that come home from war with PTSD is staggering. Nobody comes back from war unscarred, even if they didn't get a scratch on them in battle. These days, our combat vets have programs through the VA that can help them through it, although getting into those programs these days can be frustrating and time-consuming. Back in the days of the Second World War, PTSD wasn't even a recognized condition.
Eric Lomax (Irvine) certainly has scars, some which aren't visible at all. Captured by the Japanese after the Fall of Singapore, he and his fellow soldiers were sent to work on the Burma-Siam Railway which was also called the Death Railway for the number of prisoners of war and Asian civilians who died in its construction. Lomax, a railway enthusiast and an engineer, was spared the forced labor because engineers were needed for other tasks. In secret, he also built a radio receiver which would have devastating consequences for Eric when it was discovered.
Years later, Eric (Firth) has met a nurse named Patti (Kidman) whom he has fallen deeply in love with. The two get married but Patti is troubled by her husband's frequent night terrors, his violent mood swings and panic attacks. Whatever shell he has built around himself to cope with what he has been through is crumbling. Desperate, she talks to Finlay (Skarsgard), his best friend who at first is reluctant to talk to her about what Eric went through but at last gives in. Eric was brutally tortured, facilitated by a translator named Takeshi Nagase (Ishida).
Not long after, Finlay brings news to that Nagase is still alive. The former translator is now a museum tour guide (Sanada) in the very building the atrocities were committed in. Finlay urges Eric to go to Thailand and confront Nagase. Eric is reluctant to but a dramatic act by Finlay convinces him to go.
This is a true story, based on Lomax' own autobiography. While a few facts were fudged – the meeting between Nagase and Lomax was portrayed as a complete surprise to Nagase when in fact the former translator had been prepared for his arrival through correspondence, and while Lomax' motives to go to Thailand were portrayed here as initially a need to take vengeance, his book states clearly that he went to seek closure and confront his former tormentor face to face. It also doesn't mention that Eric had been previously married and had three children by that marriage who figured in the actual story as well. Other than that (which are major issues it must be admitted) and the time compression of some events, the movie pretty much follows the book closely.
Firth has a difficult role to play. Not only is he a man in deep mental anguish, he also has to play a shy, retiring sort more interested in railroads than people, yet with a good heart. We get every side of Eric Lomax here, from the man in pain to the man bestowing the most divine of human gifts that one can give another, and I'm not talking American Express gift cards here.
Kidman's role is less complex but she performs it no less satisfactorily. This isn't a real glamour role for the star but she is still as lustrous as ever. She's not a background performer here, although her character does take a backseat to Firth's but then again, it's not called The Railway Woman.
The message is a powerful one. Lomax not only forgives Nagase, but recognizes that his pain runs deep as well. When Nagase reads those words and collapses in tears, there wasn't a dry eye in the house. Sometimes all we need is acknowledgement that we are hurting to make us feel better.
The depictions of torture are pretty graphic. Those who are wondering what waterboarding is will get a good idea of it when watching this movie. It serves as a reminder that our leaders who authorized using it as a means of extracting information failed to learn from history when it comes for the effectiveness of this method in getting reliable intelligence. It had the extra added side effect that it made me even more angry at the CIA, the Bush Administration and our military for allowing it to happen. We are supposed to be better than that and I expect our political and military leaders to be better than that.
To forgive is divine and never is it as divine as when a wrong as heinous as this is committed on a person. Hollywood is quick to make movies about revenge but movies about forgiveness are few and far between. While the filmmakers belabor their point a bit, I still think that if we made more movies emphasizing forgiveness that we as a culture would benefit greatly.
REASONS TO GO: Terrific job by Firth. The theme of forgiveness is powerful and unusual for a Hollywood film.
REASONS TO STAY: Overplays its point.
FAMILY VALUES: Some disturbing violence against prisoners of war.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: The real Patti Lomax attended the premiere of the film at the Toronto Film Festival last year and received a standing ovation at the conclusion of the film.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: The Bridge Over the River Kwai
NEXT: Transcendence
Posted in New Releases	| Tagged based on an autobiography, Bridge on the River Kwai, British Army, British cinema, Burma-Siam Railway, cinema, Colin Firth, combat veterans, Death Railway, Eric Lomax, Films, forgiveness, Hiroyuki Sanada, Jeremy Irvine, movies, Nicole Kidman, Post Traumatic Stress Disease, PTSD, reviews, Sam Reid, Stellan Skarsgard, Tanroh Ishida, The Railway Man, timetables, true-life drama, wedding, Weinstein, World War II	| Leave a reply
Anna Karenina (2012)
Alone in a crowd,
(2012) Drama (Focus) Keira Knightley, Jude Law, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Kelly Macdonald, Matthew Macfadyen, Domhnall Gleeson, Ruth Wilson, Alicia Vikander, Olivia Williams, Emily Watson, David Wilmot, Shirley Henderson, Holiday Grainger, Pip Torrens, Susanne Lothar, Alexandra Roach, Luke Newberry, Aruthan Galieva, Tannishtha Chatterjee. Directed by Joe Wright
Everyone knows the old saw that love is blind. We mostly come to think that it means that looks and faults don't matter when you're in love, but I don't think that's really the case. What I think that the statement means is that we are blind to the consequences of falling in love, so emotionally inundated we are by love.
The Leo Tolstoy classic has been made into big screen extravaganzas several times, most notably with the legendary Greta Garbo in the title role (twice). Here we get Keira Knightley who has shown that she has plenty of talent although perhaps not quite a match to her luminous beauty which is considerable; the girl might just be the prettiest face in all the world.
A brief plot synopsis for those not familiar with the Tolstoy work; Anna is the wife of Karenin (Law), a well-respected Russian government official in Tsarist Russia but one can scarcely characterize the marriage as a happy one. Karenin is emotionally distant, occasionally affectionate but generally not present. Many women over the years have identified with Anna, alone in a marriage to a man who barely realizes she's there at all.
When she takes the train to Moscow on behalf of her brother, Count Oblonsky (Macfadyen) who has cheated on his wife and who has sent him to plead with said wife Dolly (Macdonald) to take him back, she meets Vronsky (Taylor-Johnson), a dashing young soldier who is the object of unrequited love for Kitty (Vikander) who is anxious to marry the young man. Kitty, in the meantime, is the object of affection for Levin (Gleeson) who is thinking of freeing his serfs and is being urged by Oblonsky to take one of them for his wife. However, everything is thrown in disarray by Anna who falls in love with Vronsky. Hard.
The two begin seeing each other and are none too discreet about their feelings. This is a big no-no in St. Petersburg society at the time which tolerated affairs but only as long as they were kept in the shadows where they belong. It was a kind of hypocrisy that in a large way still informs our somewhat hypocritical views towards the sexes. Even if you're not a Russian literature enthusiast or familiar with the novel, it doesn't take much of a genius to figure out that this all leads to tragedy – and it does.
Wright has taken the conceit of staging the movie as if it were a play in a dilapidated theater (and in fact, they filmed in one just outside of London which was essentially the main filming location). There are backdrops that are very theatrical and occasionally we see audience members in box seats observing the drama. Players in the play sometimes step onto the front of the stage and address the audience directly. It's certainly a bold move, the kind of thing someone like Baz Luhrmann might do.
But I have to admit it all feels kind of gimmicky and there's no doubt that the stage-centric production design sometimes gets distracting. The costumes are lush enough (costume designer Jacqueline Durran won an Oscar for it) and the movie looks amazing, thanks in large part to cinematographer Seamus McGarvey.
The acting though is kind of spotty, surprisingly. Law fares the best, making Karenin who often comes off as uncaring and downright mean in other filmed versions of the novel almost sympathetic here. Macfadyen, as the lusty Oblonsky, also performs well as a character that is a bit of a cad. Knightley, however, is oddly subdued here. There are almost no sparks between her and Taylor-Johnson which is critical – you have to be able to see why Anna would risk so much and get the depth of the emotion she feels for Vronsky. It is not helped by Taylor-Johnson who makes Vronsky something of a caricature. The miscasting for the role is obvious – and crucial.
The British film industry has always been reliable about producing costume epics as well as anyone, particularly those based on classics and Wright, with Sense and Sensibility and Atonement both to his credit, is as adept as anyone working now at the genre. However, the overwrought concept soon overwhelms the story and becomes more the focus than Tolstoy's classic tale does. My recommendation is either read the novel or if you prefer seeing it onscreen is to find the 1935 version with Garbo which really is a classic. This is more of a noble failure.
WHY RENT THIS: Sumptuous production design and costumes. Decent performances by Law and Macfadyen.
WHY RENT SOMETHING ELSE: Overwrought. Conceit of giving the film the look of a theatrical performance becomes distracting.
FAMILY VALUES: There is some sexuality and violence.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Cinematographer Philippe Rousselot had to leave the film during pre-production due to painful sciatica which eventually required back surgery. He was replaced by Wright's regular collaborator Seamus McGarvey.
NOTABLE HOME VIDEO EXTRAS: There is a nifty time lapse photograph of the main set's construction as well as interviews with the cast members.
BOX OFFICE PERFORMANCE: $68.9M on a $51.6M production budget.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: In Secret
NEXT: Mr. Peabody and Sherman
Posted in DVD Review	| Tagged 19th Century, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, affair, Alicia Vikander, Anna Karenina, based on a classic novel, cinema, David Wilmot, Domhnall Gleeson, Drama, DVD Reviews, Emily Watson, Films, Focus Features, forgiveness, happiness, Holliday Grainger, Joe Wright, Jude Law, Keira Knightley, Kelly Macdonald, Leo Toystoy, love triangle, Matthew Macfadyen, Moscow, movies, Olivia Williams, Our Film Library, Our Film Library 2014, scandal, Shirley Henderson, theatrical, Tsarist Russia, unrequited love	| Leave a reply
All is Bright (Almost Christmas)
Paul Giamatti has taken the Beatles "I Am the Walrus" too much to heart.
(2013) Comedy (Anchor Bay) Paul Giamatti, Phil Rudd, Sally Hawkins, Peter Hermann, Hailey Feiffer, Michael Drayer, Amy Landecker, Curtiss Cook, Colman Domingo, Tatyana Richaud, Adam Phillips, Nikki M. James, Gordon Joseph Weiss, Darren Goldstein, Rob Munk, Morgan Spector, Marcia Haufrecht, Gracie Lopez, Liza Colon-Zayas. Directed by Phil Morrison
It is part of the human condition that we all need love. Not just to love something but to be loved back in return. I guess it has something with the urge to perpetuate the species but it has become much more complicated than that over time.
Dennis (Giamatti) is a criminal in rural Quebec who has spent four years in prison for a robbery. His partner, Rene (Rudd) didn't show up when he was supposed to, leaving Dennis to hold the bag and do the time. While Dennis was in the slam, Rene was stealing away Dennis' wife Therese (Landecker) who has told their daughter Michi (Richaud) that her dad died of cancer. Nice.
Dennis goes to see Rene and you would think it would be to open up a can of whoop ass but Dennis has other needs. He desires to go straight but he is out of cash, can't get a job and is one step shy of being homeless. Rene has a job – he is delivering and selling Christmas Trees in New York. Dennis persuades Rene that he owes Dennis a job and Rene reluctantly agrees. Of course, Dennis is on parole and isn't supposed to leave town but Dennis has another motive – he promised to buy Michi a piano and he means to keep his promise, even though Michi won't know her dad is alive.
Easier said than done though. Dennis and Rene aren't exactly experienced salesmen and they choose a rat-infested vacant lot to sell their trees. Moreover a slick operation from Vermont sets up shop across the street and before long the two criminals from Quebec are staring at a holiday season with no trees sold in the face. Dennis is befriended by Olga (Hawkins), a Russian dental assistant house sitting her employers' home for the holidays after he sells her a tree and installs it for her but it takes some old fashioned intimidation to get their spot to themselves.
Dennis and Rene bicker but it looks like things are turning the corner. However, guys like this never can get a break and something occurs that threatens to send them home empty-handed and for Dennis that idea is absolutely intolerable as it is for Rene – who means to marry Therese. At least, just as soon as his own divorce is final.
Morrison last directed a feature eight years ago but that was the acclaimed Junebug which started Amy Adams' career with an Oscar nominated performance. Like that film, the characters here are quirky and complex and not in an indie-cute kind of way but more in a depth of field kind of way. These are characters with a topography.
Giamatti despite a very unfortunate facial hair situation commands attention here. Dennis is temperamental and prone to flying off into rages at a moment's notice. He still loves his wife despite her betrayal and his daughter beyond measure. He even has a soft spot for Rene, although that is sorely tested. Dennis tries very hard but occasionally can't help his criminal behavior which has been engrained in him. Giamatti gives Dennis all that and a soul too.
Rudd is a very likable actor but he translates that likability to blandness here. Rene is a compulsive talker who quickly gets on Dennis' nerves (and ours) and always seems to do the wrong thing with the best of intentions. He isn't terribly bright but he is likable. Granted, this is kind of a hard role to play but Rudd doesn't give it a lot of life.
I blow hot and cold about Sally Hawkins. She can be very irritating (Happy-Go-Lucky) and very compelling (Made in Dagenham). Here she has an over-the-top Russian accent and a kind of Natasha Fatale attitude. I actually kind of liked her here but I think the part would have been better served to keep her English background and let her be a little bit more natural. That's just me though.
The Christmas vibe here isn't as overwhelming as other movies we review this time of year. It isn't a Christmas movie per se in that the film isn't about the holiday – it just takes place during the holiday a la Home Alone. The good news is that the themes of friendship, needing to be love, forgiveness and sacrifice all have a place in the holiday spirit and so this kind of squeaks by.
I liked that the movie lets the audience mull those themes over without being overt about them – that Dennis finds a way to co-exist with someone he was so thoroughly wronged by is nothing short of miraculous (and unlikely) but I think that at the end of the day he does so not only for his own ends but so he can deliver on a promise made to his child. You can't get any more Christmas-y than that.
REASONS TO GO: Paul Giamatti. Quirky in a good way. Thought-provoking.
REASONS TO STAY: Paul Giamatti's facial hair. A bit aimless.
FAMILY VALUES: Plenty of bad language and some brief nudity.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: The movie played the Tribeca Film Festival under the title Almost Christmas but changed names for its theatrical release.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 12/22/13: Rotten Tomatoes: 45% positive reviews. Metacritic: 54/100.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Bad Santa
Posted in New Releases	| Tagged All is Bright, Almost Christmas, Amy Landecker, Anchor Bay, border crossing, Christmas, Christmas trees, cinema, comedy, Films, forgiveness, homeless, housesitting, movies, New York City, parolee, Paul Giamatti, Phil Rudd, piano, prison, Quebec, reviews, Sally Hawkins, The Holly and the Quill, The Holly and the Quill 2013	| Leave a reply
The Act of Killing
A surreal musical number from the movie within a movie.
(2012) Documentary (Drafthouse) Anwars Congo, Herman Koto, Safit Pardede, Adi Zulkadry, Haji Anif, Jusuf Kalla, Ibrahim Sinik, Joshua Oppenheimer, Sakhyan Asmara, Soaduon Siregar, Syamsul Arfin, Yapto Soerjosoemano. Directed by Joshua Oppenheimer
Some movies are meant to be light entertainment, a means of forgetting your troubles for a couple of hours. This isn't one of those. THIS is a movie that isn't meant to be enjoyed so much as experienced, one that will leave you struggling with the powerful emotions and concepts it brings out in you when the movie's over.
Starting in 1965, assassinations of Indonesian generals in an attempt to destabilize the government led to General Suharto taking control of the government. This in turn led to almost a year of unbridled mass murder ostensibly to rid the country of communists who were blamed for the assassinations. In reality, the job was given to a large extent to members of organized crime and the definition of "communists" was broadened a bit to include those who in general disagreed with the military junta and all ethnic Chinese. Later it was essentially expanded to "anyone who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time."
One of the more revered of the death squad leaders is Anwars Congo. Now a white-haired grandfatherly sort, he is one of the founding fathers of the paramilitary organization Pemuda Pancasila, or Pancasila Youth. He, like the other death squad leaders, have never answered for their crimes of murdering civilians in cold blood. In fact, they are thought to be heroes and boast openly about being able to do whatever they wanted, including wanton rape and looting.
Congo tells us that the stink from the blood of the victims had grown so great that he chose to start using a wire garrote to kill his victims which required less cleaning up after. In an extraordinary move, director Oppenheimer gives Congo and a few of his cronies the opportunity to re-enact their atrocities on film in whatever style they liked.
Why would they want to, you may ask? Well, these were men heavily influenced by American b-movies (Congo had gotten his start scalping cinema tickets) and during those terrible months of late 1965 and early 1966, often used westerns and gangster movies as inspiration to carry out their heinous acts. So they do just that, filming in the style of noir, gangster movies and yes, even a musical number which concludes with the spirit of one of the victims thanking Congo for murdering him and sending him to heaven, after which he shakes the mass murderer's hand and raises it in triumph like a prize fighter.
The cognitive dissonance depicted in this film is mind-blowing. Gangsters are looked upon with admiration. They claim that the term gangster means "free men" (a misconception that is repeated often by the ex-criminals) and reveled in the complete freedom to do whatever they chose without regard to law or morality. The bullying and terrifying tactics are looked upon as national symbols of pride.
While most of the perpetrators have no outward remorse or guilt over their acts, cracks begin to show in Congo's facade. He complains of nightmares that plague him nightly. Things begin to unravel when he portrays a victim being strangled in a police office. He wonders aloud if his victims felt what he did (the experience so unnerved him that he was unable to continue). Off-camera, Oppenheimer says gently but firmly that they felt much worse; they knew they were going to die while Congo knew that in his case, it was just a movie.
This leads to the denouement when Congo returns to the rooftop where he committed many of the savage acts. His growing realization over what he had done leads to one of the most compelling and literally gut-wrenching scenes in modern cinematic history.
In the viewer, there is an immediate instinct to go and comfort the grandfatherly Congo, but then we reach an epiphany of our own – does this man who committed so many monstrous acts (he claims to have killed about a thousand people personally) deserve comfort? Is there no forgiveness for him? That is a question I'm still wrestling with. How does one redeem oneself for mass murder? I honestly don't know the answer to that one. I don't think anybody does.
Leaving the Enzian afterwards, there was so much swirling around in my head and in my heart (as was occurring with my wife as well) that the normal discussion about the film was a bit muted. I can't say that this movie is enjoyable – but I can say that it's important. Given our own propensity for mass shootings these days and the genocidal events that occur to this day, it's sometimes hard to accept that there is any goodness inside the human race at all and it makes one wonder if the universe wouldn't be a better place if the entire planet were wiped out by a convenient meteor strike. However, watching he change that occurs in someone who was such a monster at one time gives me hope that there might actually be some humanity in the human race after all.
REASONS TO GO: Makes you think and feel. One of the most powerful and moving climaxes in recent cinematic history.
REASONS TO STAY: Seems stagnant and redundant in a few places although the film's climax brings all the parts together.
FAMILY VALUES: Some foul language. The themes are extremely adult (dealing with mass murder) and there are some intimations of children endangered. Also, lots and lots of smoking.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Werner Herzog and Errol Morris, two of the world's most acclaimed documentarians, were so moved by this film that they came aboard as executive producers.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 9/24/13: Rotten Tomatoes: 97% positive reviews. Metacritic: 89/100
COMPARISON SHOPPING: The Year of Living Dangerously
NEXT: The Family
Posted in New Releases	| Tagged 1965-66 killings, Anwars Congo, cinema, communists, coup, Documentary, Drafthouse Films, Errol Morris, Films, forgiveness, gangsters, genocide, impunity, Indonesia, mass murder, movie within a movie, movies, musical numbers, paramilitary organization, redemption, reviews, The Act of Killing, TV talk show, Warner Herzog	| Leave a reply


text:
Asian Cases
Brazilian Cases
Brutal Cases
Exchange Program Cases
International Cases
Weird Cases
Pychiatric Hospitals
Home » Massacre » Vladislav Roslyakov, and his school massacre in Crimea, Russia
Vladislav Roslyakov, and his school massacre in Crimea, Russia
30 July, 2021 29 July, 2021 by Juliane Cunha
The largest school massacre that occurred in Russia, was carried out in 2018 by a school student, in total there were almost 100 people between dead and wounded.
The massacre at Kerch Polytechnic College was a school massacre that took place on October 17, 2018, in the town of Kerch on the Crimean peninsula, which was annexed in 2014 by Russia.
Vladislav Roslyakov, aged 18 at the time of the crime, shot and killed 21 people, including himself, who committed suicide after the massacre, and injured around 70.
Wearing a white T-shirt and black pants, he wore clothes very similar to one of the perpetrators of the famous Columbine High School massacre, which occurred in a school in the United States in 1999. Indicating strong possibilities that his inspiration came from him.
Who was the perpetrator of the murders?
He had been a student at the school since 2015, and was in his senior year. His parents were divorced and he lived with his mother, who worked as a nurse at a local medical clinic. The young man had no social network with his name on it.
The shooter's ex-girlfriend, a 15-year-old who did not have her identity revealed, told a Russian channel that him intention was to take revenge on the students who humiliated him.
He said that he no longer trusted people since his classmates started to humiliate him because he was not like the others. (…) When we talked, everything was fine, he was good and sensitive, and he helped me when I was bad.
Said his ex-girlfriend.
The perpetrator bought a gun a month before the massacre and ammunition just a few days before. All purchased legally in a specialty store in the area. He had passed the psychological tests to carry a gun.
Vladislav began the attack at Kerch Polytechnic College by setting up two homemade bombs at the school. One did not explode and was later disarmed by police, while the other, which was a nail bomb, exploded in the cafeteria and injured several students, who had to amputate members of their bodies to survive.
He then began walking around the school and randomly shooting people and objects. He shot everyone in front of him, including teachers, students, and even objects.
Video of the attack
School security cameras
In total, including dead and wounded, the number reached almost 100 people. Of the 20 fatalities, 15 were students and five were employees. Nine were under the age of 18, and the youngest victim was 15.
After carrying out his massacre and running out of ammunition, the student committed suicide in the school library, shooting himself in the head.
Brazilian, 27 years old, working in the health field. I love writing and I also love criminal cases, nothing better than combining business with pleasure. Follow me on Instagram down below ☺
Roberta Dias, pregnant had body found nine years after murder
Rebecca Reusch, the disappearance that shocked Germany
Tanya Kach, kidnapped and locked in a room for 10 years
Polly Klaas, kidnapped and killed during a sleepover
Jenna Ray Robbins: child missing since 1989 in a clueless case
Mystery of the somerton man: Taman Shud case
John Wayne Gacy, the killer clown who had a cemetery in his house
Rui Pedro, missing and found on The Wonderland Club, child porn site
Mitrice Richardson, disappeared after leaving the police station
William Bonin, raped and murdered of a minimum of 21 young men
Kristin Rossum, killed her husband by poisoning
Christina Grimmie, singer shot dead after concert
John Bobbitt, had his penis cut off by his wife
Johnson on John Edward Jones, stucked and died in the Nutty Putty Cave 12 January, 2022
dumbass
Rj on John Edward Jones, stucked and died in the Nutty Putty Cave 11 January, 2022
Right these ppl are a trip
Brandon on John Edward Jones, stucked and died in the Nutty Putty Cave 10 January, 2022
Some of us like to live life, not sleep through it.
Tracy Parker on Verphy Kudi, the mother who abandoned her baby for 6 days 2 January, 2022
Life for a life 9 years is a joke !!!….
Susan Aldorino on Verphy Kudi, the mother who abandoned her baby for 6 days 2 January, 2022
It breaks my heart. What an evil bitch she is to let that poor baby suffer like that. Hang her…
Caso Criminal © 2022 - All rights reserved.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Grab Values between Slashes using Regex
http://example.com/...../post/index/88/mike-hey-dddd

I need to grab the ##

index/##/

"##" denotes numeric value.
I'm planning to run the regex is javascript.

A: You can use the \/ to escape slashes you want to use in your regular expressions:
So the result would be:
var input = "http://example.com/...../post/index/88/mike-hey-dddd";

var match = input.match(/\/index\/(\d+)/i);

// Make sure to validate the result, as it might not
// match for a given alternative url.
var number = match ? match[1] : false;

alert(number);

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


In my previous post, I shared some PowerShell scripts for managing hosts files. If you're a SharePoint developer, then you know that adding a hostname to the hosts file is only part of the process you need to complete whenever creating a new Web application in development environments.
After reading my previous post, you may have immediately asked something like "What about the BackConnectionHostNames registry entry?" This, of course, assumes you don't use the "sledge hammer" approach listed in KB 896861 (a.k.a. "Method 2: Disable the loopback check (less-recommended method)").
Or perhaps you already noticed the Add-BackConnectionHostNames.ps1 script in my sample solution for an extranet site based on SharePoint Server 2010.
In the Fabrikam Extranet solution, the "Create Web Application.ps1" script checks if the environment is configured to use http://extranet-local.fabrikam.com. If it is, the Add-BackConnectionHostNames.ps1 script is used to add extranet-local.fabrikam.com to the HKLM:\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa\MSV1_0\BackConnectionHostNames registry key.
That way, when people want to deploy the solution with as little effort as possible, they can simply run the "Rebuild Web Application.ps1" script and not have to worry about manually performing the steps in section 4.10 (Allow specific host names mapped to 127.0.0.1).
I fixed a bug in the following scripts when more than one hostname is specified in the registry value. See my GitHub repository for details on the changes made to the original versions of the scripts.
security check for specific host names.
Adds one or more host names to the BackConnectionHostNames registry value.
Removes one or more host names from the BackConnectionHostNames registry value.
Nice scripts, saved me a ton of work, I've just wrapped these up as functions as part of a bigger script I'm using for when deploying WCF applications behind a load balancer, where they call shared services that may be on the same host.


text:
UN Replies To Elon Musk's Request With "Proof" Of How His Money Will Help Starving
Recently, Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, SpaceX, and multi-billionaire had promised to sell a portion of his Tesla shares. He would then donate the proceeds to the United Nations to fund their fight against famine. However, he wanted the leaders of the organization to give him a clear plan about how the $6Bn is going to be used. For more about Musk's reply:
Read: Elon Musk Responds To The United Nation's Claim That 2% Of His Wealth Could Solve World Hunger
The UN announced this week that they have "proof" that the $6 billion figure will do the job. David Beasley, the director of the World Food Programme of the UN, had originally requested billionaires such as Musk and Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, to help out in fighting world hunger.
Elon Musk's Pledge To The UN's Mission
Musk had replied to Beasley's original tweet with the request for a detailed plan. He had told Beasley that if the WFP could describe how $6Bn can stop world hunger, then he was willing to sell Tesla stock immediately to raise the required amount. However, Musk wanted accounting to be open source. Because he wanted the public to also be aware of where the money will be spent.
The world is on fire. I've been warning about the perfect storm brewing due to Covid, conflict, climate shocks & now, rising supply chain costs. IT IS HERE. 45M lives are at stake—and increasing daily. If you don't feed people, you feed conflict, destabilization & mass migration. pic.twitter.com/VotIZlEAGE
— David Beasley (@WFPChief) November 15, 2021
Earlier this week on Twitter, Beasley replied that the world is alight. He said that he had warned about a perfect storm forming, caused by climate shocks, conflict, Covid, and rising costs in the supply chain. He then emphatically stated that the perfect storm has arrived. Beasley claimed that 45Mn lives and more are at risk. He explained that not feeding people increases conflict, destabilization, and, thus, mass migration.
He continued by saying that the present hunger crisis is unprecedented and urgent but it could be avoided. He tags Elon Musk and his request for open books and a detailed plan and presents them. Beasley concluded by saying that the organization is prepared to converse with Musk and whoever else is willing to save lives. The required amount to stop famine from happening in 2022 is $6.6Bn.
The Overview Of The UN Plan
Beasley also added a link that would take one to the website of the United Nations. There one can get a clear outline of the direction of spending. Here is a short summary:
$3.5Bn for procuring and delivering food. This includes the shipping and transportation costs, plus the cost of warehousing. It also includes the cost for delivering the "last mile" which can involve river, land, and air transport. Moreover, sometimes security escorts and contracted drivers will be required for distributing food in zones affected by conflict. The people in these areas are those who require it the most.
$2Bn for food vouchers and cash. This is for the areas where markets are an option. This assistance can help the needy ones to buy their choice of food as well as support local economies.
$700Mn for designing, scaling up, and managing effective and efficient programs that will be customized per country for 43 countries. The programs will ensure the distribution of several million more cash transfers and food vouchers. This includes the costs for running offices and satellite offices, their security, and their monitoring of results and distributions.
$400Mn for regional and global accountability, administration, and regional operations. This will include the costs for coordinating aviation routes and supply lines across the world, Coordination would involve contracting freights, analyzing and monitoring worldwide hunger as well as risk management. This will also include the cost of hiring independent auditors who will be overseeing the operations.
Read: This 17 Year Old Won $250,000 Prize In A Teen Science Fair For Inventing A Tool That Could Prevent Starvation In Africa
However, Beasley also stated this will not "solve" the hunger crisis. But it would still save millions of lives. The $6B will definitely ensure geopolitical stability and thus prevent mass migration and potentially save 42Mn from starving to death.
Elon Musk has not yet responded to the latest document from Beasley.
Image credits: FMSC Distribution Partner, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
The Royal Society, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons
? Does Big Age Difference Matter In Relationships? Here Is What People Say 6 Things That Can Destroy A Friendship ?


text:
Estimation of the Frequency of Functioning Gametes in Monosomics
J. G. BHOWAL1,2 nAff2 &
A. K. ROY CHOUDHURY1
IN monosomics, two types of gametes having n and (n–1) chromosomes are formed, and the segregation of the three types of plant, 2n (disomic), 2n–1 (monosomic) and 2n–2 (nullisomic), in the progeny of a monosomic is dependent on the frequencies of the n and (n–1) chromosome gametes on the male and female sides. The functional frequencies of n and n–1 male and female gametes can be determined experimentally by making reciprocal crosses between a normal plant and a monosomic. Estimates of the frequencies of n and n–1 gametes on either the male or the female side can be obtained from the observed numbers of disomics, monosomics and nullisomics when the frequencies of gametes on one side are known.
Bhowal, J. G., Canad. J. Bot., 142, 1321 (1964).
Sears, E. R., Genetics, 29, 232 (1944).
J. G. BHOWAL
Present address: Division of Botany, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Delhi, 12
Bose Institute, Calcutta, 9, India
& A. K. ROY CHOUDHURY
Division of Botany, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Delhi, 12
Search for J. G. BHOWAL in:
Search for A. K. ROY CHOUDHURY in:
BHOWAL, J., CHOUDHURY, A. Estimation of the Frequency of Functioning Gametes in Monosomics. Nature 206, 1067–1068 (1965) doi:10.1038/2061067b0
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/2061067b0
A. K. ROY CHOUDHURY
& J. G. BHOWAL


The Senate rejected Wednesday -- for the fourth time -- a bill that would have reauthorized extended benefits for the long-term unemployed, by a vote of 58 to 38. Democrats will not make another effort to break the Republican filibuster before adjourning for the July 4 recess.
By the time lawmakers return to Washington, more than 2 million people who've been out of work for longer than six months will have missed checks they would have received if they'd been laid off closer to the beginning of the recession.
Only two Republicans, Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, crossed the aisle to support the measure. That gave Democrats 59 of the 60 votes they needed to break the GOP filibuster, but without the late Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson's nay vote was enough to kill the bill.
"We will vote on this measure again once there is a replacement named for the late Senator Byrd," Reid said in a statement after the vote. "In the meantime, I sincerely hope that Republicans will finally listen to the millions of unemployed Americans who need this assistance to support their families in these tough times. These Americans and millions more demand that Republicans stop filibustering support for unemployed workers."
Already, more than 1.2 million people out of work for longer than six months have missed checks since federally-funded extended benefits lapsed at the beginning of June.
"Senators had a chance to put election year posturing aside and one too few rose to that challenge," said Judy Conti, a lobbyist for the National Employment Law Project. "It's a sad night, especially for the over one million workers and their families who will have little cause to celebrate this holiday weekend. It is a disgrace and an absolute slap in the face to basic human decency."
as there is nothing in it for me..
I am Mitch Mcconnell from the great state of Kentucky.
I forgot why I voted against extending unemployment benefits.
Give me a break, I have been camped in D.C. since 1985.
receiving as a junior Senator!
WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a landmark overhaul of financial regulations but the Senate put off action until mid-July, delaying a final victory for President Barack Obama.
Still, the 237 to 192 vote in the House marked a win for Obama and his fellow Democrats, who have made the most sweeping rewrite of Wall Street rules since the 1930s a top priority in the wake of the 2007-2009 financial crisis.
"That's why were are here today, to make sure that never happens again," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said. "We will pass the toughest set of Wall Street reforms in generations."
Analysts say Obama is all but certain to get the measure on his desk eventually, but Democrats' hopes of sending a bill to him to sign into law by the July 4 Independence Day holiday were dashed.
The death of Democratic Senator Robert Byrd and cold feet among Republican allies has complicated efforts to round up the votes needed in the Senate. A week-long break following the July 4 Independence Day holiday means the Senate won't act until the week of July 12, at the earliest.
The bill would impose tighter regulations on financial firms and reduce their profits. It would boost consumer protections, force banks to reduce risky trading and investing activities and set up a new government process for liquidating troubled financial firms.
With congressional elections approaching in November, Democrats have ridden a wave of public disgust at an industry that has awarded itself fat paydays while the rest of the country struggles with high unemployment.
Wall Street and Republicans have tried to delay the bill or lessen its reach, but the measure has actually gotten tougher during its year-long journey through Congress.
Republicans say the bill would hurt the economy by burdening businesses with a thicket of new regulations. They also point out that it ducks the question of how to handle troubled mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which Democrats plan to tackle next year.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which own or guarantee half of all U.S. mortgages, have received a total of about $145 billion in taxpayer bailouts since being seized by the government in September 2008. Their regulator has said he does not know how much more taxpayer support they will need.
"All this bill before us does is perpetuate the same dumb regulation that got us into this financial pickle in the first place," said Republican Representative Jeb Hensarling.
Democrats have seized the opportunity to link their political foes with an unpopular industry. Obama on Wednesday accused Republicans of being out of touch with the American people for opposing reforms, and others echoed his line of attack on the House floor.
WASHINGTON — There are no Secret Service agents posted next to the barista and no presidential seal on the ceiling, but the Caribou Coffee across the street from the White House has become a favorite meeting spot to conduct Obama administration business.
Here at the Caribou on Pennsylvania Avenue, and a few other nearby coffee shops, White House officials have met hundreds of times over the last 18 months with prominent K Street lobbyists — members of the same industry that President Obama has derided for what he calls its "outsized influence" in the capital.
On the agenda over espressos and lattes, according to more than a dozen lobbyists and political operatives who have taken part in the sessions, have been front-burner issues like Wall Street regulation, health care rules, federal stimulus money, energy policy and climate control — and their impact on the lobbyists' corporate clients.
The off-site meetings, lobbyists say, reveal a disconnect between the Obama administration's public rhetoric — with Mr. Obama himself frequently thrashing big industries' "battalions" of lobbyists as enemies of reform — and the administration's continuing, private dealings with them.
White House officials said there was nothing improper about the off-site meetings.
Grandpa: of course there was nothing improper about the off-site meetings. They merely met off-site as Caribou's coffee is way better than the "office coffee".
On Monday good-government group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) asked a House committee to look into whether the Obama White House violated federal laws regarding electronic records by using private email accounts to communicate with lobbyists and meeting with lobbyists outside the White House.
CREW wrote a letter to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform asking it to investigate and hold hearings to determine any violations of the Presidential Records Act (PRA) and Federal Records Act (FRA).
The group's letter is in response to an article in The New York Times on June 25 that said Obama White House officials have met "hundreds of times" over the last 18 months with prominent Washington lobbyists.
"But because the discussions are not taking place at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, they are not subject to disclosure on the visitors' log that the White House releases as part of its pledge to be the "most transparent presidential administration in history," the New York Times reported.
The Times also reported that lobbyists said they "routinely" get emails from White House staff members' personal accounts, not their White House emails which are subject to public records review.
The White House declined to comment on the CREW letter calling for the investigation.
As a candidate and as president, Obama has been sharply critical of lobbyists and their influence in the political process. He pledged to institute greater transparency and to close the revolving lobby door in Washington.
This isn't the first time CREW has called the Obama White House out for transparency.
After CREW filed a lawsuit last summer to force the President Obama to share White House visitors logs with the public, the White House on September 4 announced its new disclosure policy to regularly make public most of the names of visitors to the White House.
Recently, the federal government has been recording the largest budget deficits, as a share of the economy, since the end of World War II. As a result of those deficits, the amount of federal debt held by the public has surged. At the end of 2008, that debt equaled 40 percent of the nation's annual economic output (as measured by gross domestic product, or GDP), a little above the 40 year average of 36 percent. Since then, large budget deficits have caused debt held by the public to shoot upward; the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that federal debt will reach 62 percent of GDP by the end of this year—the highest percentage since shortly after World War II. The sharp rise in debt stems partly from lower tax revenues and higher federal spending related to the recent severe recession and turmoil in financial markets. However, the growing debt also reflects an imbalance between spending and revenues that predated those economic developments.
As the economy recovers and the policies adopted to counteract the recession and the financial turmoil phase out, budget deficits will probably decline markedly in the next few years. But over the long term, the budget out look is daunting. The retirement of the baby boom generation portends a significant and sustained increase in the share of the population receiving benefits from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Moreover, per capita spending for health care is likely to continue rising faster than spending per person on other goods and services for many years (although the magnitude of that gap is very uncertain). Without significant changes in government policy, those factors will boost federal outlays sharply relative to GDP in coming decades under any plausible assumptions about future trends in the economy, demographics, and health care costs.
"unsustainable levels" is not a viable option!!!!
Washington, DC, June 30, 2010 - Total estimated inflows to long-term mutual funds were $5.55 billion for the week ended Wednesday, June 23, the Investment Company Institute reported today. Flow estimates are derived from data collected covering more than 95 percent of industry assets and are adjusted to represent industry totals.
Equity funds had estimated outflows of $1.27 billion for the week, compared to estimated outflows of $1.80 billion in the previous week. Domestic equity funds had estimated outflows of $1.25 billion, while estimated outflows from foreign equity funds were $17 million.
Since May 5th, 2010, $31.491 BILLION has been withdrawn from Domestic Equity Funds.
Bond funds had estimated inflows of $6.32 billion, compared to estimated inflows of $4.47 billion during the previous week. Taxable bond funds saw estimated inflows of $5.88 billion, while municipal bond funds had estimated inflows of $438 million.
During the prior 5 weeks, $22.726 BILLION has flowed in to bond funds! BOND BUBBLE TO BURST. The 10 year treasury is trading around 2.95%....WARNING...no sharp objects or flammables around the balloon.
IRVINE, Calif. – June 30, 2010 — RealtyTrac® (www.realtytrac.com), the leading online marketplace for foreclosure properties, today released its first U.S. Foreclosure Sales Report™, which shows that foreclosure homes accounted for 31 percent of all residential sales in the first quarter of 2010, and that the average sales price of properties that sold while in some stage of foreclosure was nearly 27 percent below the average sales price of properties not in the foreclosure process.
A total of 232,959 U.S. properties in some stage of foreclosure — default, scheduled for auction or bank-owned (REO) — sold to third parties in the first quarter, a decrease of 14 percent from the previous quarter and down 33 percent from the peak during the first quarter of 2009, when sales of foreclosure homes accounted for 37 percent of all residential sales.
The average sales prices on properties in some stage of foreclosure decreased 23 percent from 2006 to 2009 while the average discounts on foreclosure purchases steadily increased from 21 percent in 2006 to 27 percent in the first quarter of 2010. Discounts on REOs are larger than discounts on pre-foreclosures, although discounts on pre-foreclosures appear to be trending higher as short sales become more common.
More than 1.2 million U.S. properties in some stage of foreclosure sold to third parties in 2009, an increase of 25 percent from 2008 and an increase of nearly 327 percent from 2007. Total foreclosure sales in 2009 were up more than 1,100 percent from 2006 and up more than 2,500 percent from 2005. Foreclosure sales accounted for 29 percent of all sales in 2009, up from 23 percent in 2008 and up from 6 percent in 2007.
The average sales price of properties that sold while in some stage of foreclosure in 2009 was 25 percent below the average sales price of properties not in the foreclosure process. That was up from an average discount of 22 percent in 2008 but down from an average discount of 26 percent in 2007. The average foreclosure discount in 2005 was 35 percent, driven by a nearly 50 percent discount on REOs; however, the discount on pre-foreclosures trended up slightly over the same five-year period, from nearly 12 percent in 2005 to 15 percent in 2008 and 2009.
Bill Fleckenstein: The Financials' Earnings "Are Pure Nonsense"
.I don't know how much of those S&P earnings are due to financials: all the financial earnings are pure nonsense, they are making it all up, we don't know where assets are priced necessarily and they are bailed out on the back of the Fed putting rates at zero. So I don't believe the earnings and I don't know what the multiple's going to be. It could easily trade at ten times."
WASHINGTON — Despite lawmakers' last-minute change to win his vote, Republican Sen. Scott Brown said Wednesday he needs more time to study a sweeping overhaul of financial regulations before committing his vote.
His stance leaves Democrats short, for now, of the 60 votes they need to overcome procedural hurdles to the bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the Senate will have to wait until after the weeklong July 4 congressional break to take up the bill.
The House was expected to vote on a final, combined House-Senate bill, late Wednesday afternoon.
Congressional Democrats have been inching closer to passage of a major rewrite of financial industry regulations, making fixes as they go in hopes of securing the votes of straying Republicans.
On Tuesday, House and Senate negotiators reconvened to remove a $19 billion fee on large banks and hedge funds after Brown threatened to vote against the bill. Brown, of Massachusetts, supported a Senate version of the bill last month but said he objected to the fee, inserted by negotiators last week.
In a statement Wednesday, Brown said he appreciated the removal of the fee, but said he would review the bill over next week's recess.
"I remain committed to putting in place safeguards to prevent another financial meltdown, ensure that consumers are protected, and that this bill is paid for without new taxes," he said.
Senate Democratic leaders as expected on Wednesday postponed a final vote on Wall Street reform. The Wall Street reform conference report will not pass until Congress returns from the July 4 recess during the week of July 12, Democratic leaders said.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Wednesday that Senate procedures would not allow him to bring the bill to the floor on Thursday.
Members of the Senate will be away from Washington on Friday to attend the funeral of Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) in Charleston. "I can't because I can't procedurally get to it," Reid said.
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) said that after House approval, the soonest the Wall Street reform could pass the Senate would be Saturday or Sunday.
He expressed concern that some Republicans who are likely to vote for it might change their mind if forced to stay in session into the July 4 weekend to get the bill to President Barack Obama's desk. Dodd said the House would not likely pass the revised Wall Street reform bill until Thursday.
Final approval of the legislation was slowed by GOP opposition to a proposal to pay for its cost with a nearly $19 billion tax on large financial institutions. Dodd and other negotiators have since changed the legislation, paying for it with a plan to end the Troubled Asset Relief Program several months before its scheduled expiration.
It is unclear whether that change will win the votes of Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Maine Republicans Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, who all voted for the Senate's Wall Street reform bill.
Brown issued a non-committal statment on Wednesday. "I appreciate the conference committee revisiting the Wall Street reform bill and removing the $19 billion bank tax," Brown said in the statement. "Over the July recess, I will continue to review this important bill."
Barney Frank and Chris Dodd to remove Bank Tax and sell out kids and grandkids again!
WASHINGTON -- Responding to a threat by Scott Brown to vote against the the massive Wall Street overhaul package, US Representative Barney Frank and Senator Christopher J. Dodd were planning to reconvene a conference committee today to revisit the bill and remove a $19 billion tax on big banks that would have paid for increased oversight.
Dodd told reporters that they were planning to scrap a $19 billion bank fee – which has been Brown's latest objection – and that the 43-member committee would meet as early as this afternoon.
Brown declined to comment on the changes, telling a battery of reporters that he wanted to wait and see what the conference committee decided.
Earlier today, Brown said that he would vote against the Wall Street regulatory overhaul that was adopted by the committee last week, citing the last-minute addition of the $19 billion in bank taxes to pay for the bill. It was a switch in position for Brown, who had previously voted in favor of an earlier version in the Senate.
The Massachusetts Republican sent a letter this morning to the top House and Senate negotiators – Representative Barney Frank, of Newton, and Senator Chris Dodd, of Connecticut – to reiterate his strong opposition to the tax.
Brown sought to exempt altogether financial institutions that use banks for limited purposes, such as MassMutual and its insurance business or Fidelity Investments and its investment funds.
He also wanted to let firms invest a limited amount of their top capital in hedge funds and private equity funds. Brown initially called for a 5 percent cap, but negotiators settled on 3 percent. Those changes were backed by Boston-based State Street Corp. and Bank of New York Mellon Corp., which has several thousand Massachusetts employees.
tantrums like he is still in junior high.
Affording the Wall Street, TARP recipient pillaging thugs 12 years to comply is deemed "toughest financial reforms since the 1930s". Our grandchildren will be entering junior high by the time Goldman Sachs MIGHT comply with finanical reform!
June 29 (Bloomberg) -- Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Citigroup Inc. are among U.S. banks that may have as long as a dozen years to cut stakes in in-house hedge funds and private- equity units under a regulatory revamp agreed to last week.
Rules curbing banks' investments in their own funds would take effect 15 months to two years after a law is passed, according to the bill. Banks would have two years to comply, with the potential for three one-year extensions after that. They could seek another five years for "illiquid" funds such as private equity or real estate, said Lawrence Kaplan, an attorney at Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP in Washington.
Giving banks until 2022 to fully implement the so-called Volcker rule is an accommodation for Wall Street in what President Barack Obama called the toughest financial reforms since the 1930s. The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 forced commercial banks such as what is now JPMorgan Chase & Co. to shed their investment-banking units in less than two years.
Grandpa: Chris Dodd voted in favor of repealing Glass-Steagall in 1999 and 11 years later, he deems himself the God of Financial Reform.
"No one will know until this is actually in place how it works. But we believe we've done something that has been needed for a long time. It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done."
"Financial Reform Bill Would Stop Goldman-Style Shenanigans"
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--A divided U.S. Supreme Court on Monday struck down some federal provisions that created a private regulatory body to inspect and discipline public-company accountants, but the decision doesn't dismantle the accounting board or invalidate the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act as some critics would have liked.
The high court, in a 5-4 opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, found fault with some parts of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which was created as part of Sarbanes-Oxley to combat corporate accounting scandals in the wake of collapses at Enron and WorldCom.
Congress had given the five-member board, a not-for-profit corporation, broad regulatory authority over accounting firms that audit publicly traded companies.
Roberts said the structure of the accounting board violated constitutional separation-of-powers principles because it was too difficult for the president to remove board members.
"The president cannot take care that the laws be faithfully executed if he cannot oversee the faithfulness of the officers who execute them," Roberts wrote.
The court, however, refused to strike down the accounting board in its entirety, saying the board's mere existence didn't violate the Constitution.
PCAOB said it will continue to run all programs as usual, and no legislation will be needed to bring it in line with the Constitution. "We are pleased that the decision allows the PCAOB to continue without interruption to carry out its important mission of overseeing public company audits," said PCAOB Acting Chairman Daniel L. Goelzer.
Roberts said Sarbanes-Oxley "remains fully operative as a law." He said the unconstitutional provisions governing the board could be severed from the rest of the law.
The authors of the accounting law, in a joint statement, said "PCAOB provides essential protections to the more than half of American households that invest savings in securities."
"The decision from the Supreme Court adjusts the law in a way that allows the PCAOB to continue to ensure the integrity of public company audits," said former Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D., Md.) and Rep. Michael Oxley (R, Ohio).
Roberts said the Securities and Exchange Commission will now have the authority to remove board members at will. Previously, the SEC could only remove members for good cause.
"I am pleased that the court has determined that the board's operations may continue and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, with the board's tenure restrictions excised, remains fully in effect," said SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro. "The PCAOB is a cornerstone of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and serves a critical role in promoting investor protection and audit quality."
The intraday accumulation volume difference in the SPY is 146 million compared to an average of 220 million by EOD: a solid 33% below baseline. Today is the lowest volume day since April 26, when the market was near 2010 highs. If one assumes (simplistically) that 70% of normal daily volume is HFT and computer based, human traders have added -3% to today's trading volume. Everyone is now out watching football. Yet even with this abysmal volume, the market still was unable to stage a melt up: are even the algos fans of the Cariocas?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Monday struck down part of a 2002 law that created a national board that polices auditors of public companies, ruling that it violated the constitutional requirement on the separation of powers among the branches of government.
The high court's ruling on the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) could put pressure on Congress to revisit the Sarbanes-Oxley corporate reform law, opening it up for potential changes in the reporting duties of companies.
The court's mixed ruling held that the board violated the U.S. Constitution's separation of powers principle, but also held that the law does not violate the Constitution's appointments clause.
At stake in the case was how corporate America is audited and a key provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley corporate reform law adopted in response to the Enron and WorldCom accounting scandals early in the decade.
The ruling was a victory for the Free Enterprise Fund and a small Nevada accounting firm, which argued that the law unconstitutionally stripped the president of power to appoint or remove board members or to supervise their activities.
Board members are appointed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and can only be removed by the SEC for cause. The board, set up as a quasi-private agency, has the power to impose rules and to inspect and fine accounting firms.
The board is funded through fees it collects from public companies. It inspects thousands of auditors, including the Big Four accounting firms: Ernst & Young LLP, KPMG, PricewaterhouseCoopers and Deloitte & Touche LLP.
The Free Enterprise Fund and the accounting firm sued in 2006. A federal judge and a U.S. appeals court rejected the challenge.
The Supreme Court's majority opinion said the limits on the removal of board members violated the separation of powers requirement.
But the court also held that the unconstitutional provisions can be separated from the rest of the law.
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) stated purpose is to 'protect the interests of investors and further the public interest in the preparation of informative, fair, and independent audit reports'. How about these salaries! The salary of the PCAOB's chairman is currently $556,000 per year, while the salaries of other board members are $452,000 annually.
The Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 set new or enhanced standards for all U.S. public company boards, management and public accounting firms. The bill was enacted as a reaction to a number of major corporate and accounting scandals including those affecting Enron, Tyco International, Adelphia, Peregrine Systems and WorldCom. These scandals, which cost investors billions of dollars when the share prices of affected companies collapsed, shook public confidence in the nation's securities markets.
It does not apply to privately held companies.
Not even the Supreme Court is Granchildren Friendly! They are concerned about the separation of powers on the enforcement side while Wall Street continues their "Band of Brothers" on a unified power front to assure their "mark-to-model" valuations.
What oversight is required when the country endorses creative accounting? FASB is changing their name to FAB given the fact standards no longer apply!!
Commitments by world leaders from the G20 group of major economies to cut spending will undermine economic growth and risk scuppering recovery, experts say.
Countries have agreed at least to halve their budget deficits within three years and to stabilise the level of government debt by 2016.
But the communique from their meeting in Toronto leaves nations free to do so in their own way and at their own pace.
It is a compromise between the United States, which was pushing to maintain fiscal stimulus, and European nations such as Germany and Britain that wanted radical spending cuts.
The statement from the summit talks about the risk that synchronised cuts to government outlays will undermine the recovery.
Yet in vague terms, it also warns that failure to consolidate government finances could undermine growth.
Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Laureate economist and the renegade former chief economist at the World Bank, turned against the IMF's prescriptions of fiscal austerity as the answer to economic ills.
He says it is a fantasy to believe that cutting deficits will restore the global economy. "I think it's fantasy. I think it reflects the excess optimism about the recovery," he said. "There are almost no successful cases of countries cutting back on their expenditures as a way of getting out of the kind of economic downturn. "There are many cases where these kinds of austerity measures have led to downturns [turning] into recessions - recessions into depressions."
Risk analyst Satyajit Das agrees, but questions how countries will finance growth. "I think fundamentally Stiglitz is right in the sense that if you actually withdraw the fiscal stimulus, growth will go down," he said.
"But what Stiglitz does not answer is how, in heaven's name, the governments are going to keep financing it. "People forget that governments can only do one of two things which is tax and spend or borrow and spend.
"None of the politicians, none of the policymakers in any of the developed worlds or the G20 want to face up to the fundamental fact that we've had a period of debt-fuelled growth and that debt-fuelled growth is going to be very difficult to sustain in the future."
Banks feared that the G20 meeting would mandate a global tax on finance to make banking pay for future bailouts, but that plan was scotched.
The meeting did agree on new capital requirements for banks to be put in place within two years as an understandable and perhaps necessary response to the financial crisis.
The old pay system (era of John Whitehead): you work at an investment bank for 30 years, have a reasonable draw and cash bonus, build up stock in the firm as most of your bonus, and when you decide to retire you request of the partners their permission to go limited. If they assent, you get to withdraw your money over five years, all the while continuing to expose the balance to the risks of the enterprise.
The new pay system post-Donald Lufkin Jenrette's original I.P.O.: you're a young 29-year-old punk playing with OPM (Other People's Money), taking huge risks for which you get huge bonuses, while the outsiders shoulder the losses on your bets. You make all the money you'll ever need in three years, stay around 15 years to pile up five times as much as you need, and then you retire with your cash hoard, buy a winery in Napa/Sonoma or a huge farm in Connecticut, living above the fray for the rest of your life.
Which system, do you think, makes people consider the downside of their actions?
Foul odor and tastes like chicken?
Fraud, sleazy sales tactics to go on as before.
That's because the financial reform bill Washington is touting didn't protect investors in any substantive way. Congress failed to address the Supreme Court's "Stoneridge" decision, which would have afforded investors protection against Ponzi schemes and other large scale frauds commonly aided and abetted by large financial institutions. And don't let the headlines fool you, Congress totally punted on the requirement that brokers put their clients' interests ahead of their own, the so-called fiduciary standard. Failing to address these two issues is a one-two punch in the gut for investors.
As I previously predicted, Wall Street was able to stonewall the Stoneridge provision. A few members of Congress initially used the issue to garner some good press, but in the end they caved to Wall Street's pressure. Had they stood up to the industry's powerful interests, a provision to combat the Stoneridge decision at a minimum would have forced investment banks, accounting firms and other gate-keepers to perform a reasonable amount of due diligence on those they choose to do business with.
For example, if a bank knew it could be held liable for actions related to its dealings with a convicted felon, do you really think they would risk litigation in order to make a few shekels? I think not, but as it stands, firms can act with near impunity and support criminal activities knowing they are afforded protection by the Stoneridge decision.
As for the fiduciary standard, time will tell whether the members of Congress that loudly supported the standard will regret caving and agreeing to "study" the change's effect. Apparently it didn't matter that the SEC already studied the fiduciary standard and found that investors didn't know when they were getting actual financial advice as opposed to being sold a product. Without a congressional mandate, it's unclear whether the SEC will have the gumption to make an investor-friendly decision and adopt the standard broadly.
Though Chairman Mary Schapiro very publicly has endorsed the wide adherence to the fiduciary standard, the SEC is currently very divided. SEC investigators were only authorized to file charges against Goldman Sachs ( GS - news - people ) after SEC commissioners voted 3-2 along party lines. Indeed, getting SEC's decision-makers to agree on anything is an uphill battle to say the least.
It's actually a pretty sad day for investors, yet without a doubt some are seeing short-term gains as a result of Congress' gift to Wall Street. Long-term, however, Wall Street has gained the upper hand and has shown Washington who's in control.
Jacob H. Zamansky is a principal at the law firm Zamansky & Associates.
June 25 (Bloomberg) -- Californians don't see much evidence that the worst economic contraction since the Great Depression is coming to an end.
Unemployment was 12.4 percent in May, 2.7 percentage points higher than the national rate. Lawmakers gridlocked over how to close a $19 billion budget gap are weighing the termination of the main welfare program for 1.3 million poor families or borrowing more than $9 billion in the bond market. California, tied with Illinois for the lowest credit rating of any state, is diverting a rising portion of tax revenue to service debt, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its August issue.
Even as the U.S. appears to be on the mend -- gross domestic product has climbed three straight quarters -- finances in Arizona, Illinois, New Jersey, New York and other states show few signs of improvement. Forty-six states face budget shortfalls that add up to $112 billion for the fiscal year ending next June, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington research institution. State spending is 12 percent of U.S. GDP.
given the financial reform bill?
Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 2.7 percent in the first quarter of 2010, (that is, from the fourth quarter to the first quarter), according to the "third" estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth quarter of 2009, real GDP increased 5.6 percent.
The deceleration in real GDP in the first quarter primarily reflected decelerations in private inventory investment and in exports, a downturn in residential fixed investment, a deceleration in nonresidential fixed investment, and a larger decrease in state and local government spending that were partly offset by an acceleration in PCE.
Real personal consumption expenditures increased 3.0 percent in the first quarter, compared with an increase of 1.6 percent in the fourth. Real nonresidential fixed investment increased 2.2 percent, compared with an increase of 5.3 percent. Nonresidential structures decreased 15.5 percent, compared with a decrease of 18.0 percent. Equipment and software increased 11.4 percent, compared with an increase of 19.0 percent. Real residential fixed investment decreased 10.3 percent, in contrast to an increase of 3.8 percent.
It takes the government 3 swings to calculate GDP and the 3rd revision figure of 2.7% is down significantly from their initial guess of 3.2%.
The U.S. government spent trillions in stimulus, placed a huge debt burden on our grandchildren and the economy barely grew. The stock market "experts" paraded around CNBC day after day will now be forced to reduce their lofty earnings estimates for the 2nd half of 2010 and full year 2011.
Consumer spending fell to 3% from 3.5% earlier, business investment was revised down to 2.2% from 3.1% previously. Q1 GDP of 2.7% is less than 1/2 Q4 2009 GDP of 5.6%.
Dylan Ratigan recaps the current Financial Reform compromises and the amount of holes in what Chris Dodd and Barney Frank would have you believe is "real reform". Grab a beverage as this is a 13 minute clip however, do yourself a favor and watch! IN 2007, Chris Dodd wrote a letter to the SEC opposing very language that he now supposedly supports.
Ryan Grim of Huffington Post and Professor William Black join in and explain why Congress and the White House are trying to weaken the bill. Finally, Dylan has a clip of Larry "I am completely worthless" Summers discusses TARP and Dylan perfoms surgey on Summers with a pipe wrench! Accounting gimmicks endorsed by Ben Bernanke enable the banks to present results that are nothing but smoke and mirrors.


text:
Amid rocky transition to electric cars, Daimler cuts its dividend to lowest in a decade
BYChristoph Rauwald and Bloomberg
Daimler AG slashed its dividend to the lowest since the financial crisis and promised deeper cost cuts as Chief Executive Officer Ola Kallenius frees up cash to pay for an accelerated electrification effort in the coming year.
Kallenius, whose restructuring push has failed to gain traction in his first nine months on the job, is cutting the dividend by two thirds to 0.90 euros ($0.98) a share. Daimler will also reduce personnel costs by more than 1.4 billion euros by the end of 2022 and review non-core operations to channel more money into auto making, the German manufacturer said Tuesday.
The 50-year old CEO is under pressure to improve operations in 2020 after he issued three profit warnings since taking office last May. Daimler faces mounting vehicle recall and legal costs amid allegations of diesel-cheating. And the company has been slower than Volkswagen AG to electrify its fleet and now faces rising competition from Tesla Inc., which plans to build a factory outside Berlin.
"We are determined to materialize our technological leadership and at the same time to significantly improve profitability," Kallenius said in a statement. "Measures to cut costs and to increase cash flows are necessary."
Last year, Daimler's profit was hampered by production hiccups, ballooning expenses to fix diesel vehicles, and the cost of shifting to electric cars. Now Kallenius expects the efficiency measures to unleash a turnaround starting this year, with earnings before interest and taxes forecast to grow "significantly" compared to 2019. But the CEO faces several headwinds to make that happen — from the persistent threat of higher tariffs to the coronavirus outbreak that hit its largest market China.
Daimler rose as much as 4% in early Frankfurt trading, giving the company a market value of about 47 billion euros — less than half of Tesla's current valuation. The stock is the second-worst performer on Germany's benchmark DAX index this year.
Job cuts are a critical component of the effort to make the manufacturer leaner. While Daimler didn't detail any new personnel changes, the carmaker said last year it would eliminate more than 10,000 positions worldwide, using voluntary measures such as early retirement and attrition.
Alongside moves to rein in spending, Kallenius has outlined plans to introduce more than 20 new plug-in hybrid and fully-electric Mercedes cars by 2022.
Mercedes-Benz will introduce a fresh iteration of its S-Class flagship sedan this year and roll out the EQA, a compact electric SUV that will flank the slightly larger EQC and the EQV minivan. The brand plans to quadruple the share of plug-in hybrids and fully electric vehicles in its deliveries this year, the company said Tuesday.
—Stock scammers are using coronavirus to dupe investors, SEC warns
—Credit Suisse making a comeback, but spying scandal drags down outlook
—Why China is still so susceptible to disease outbreaks
—A new coronavirus red flag on the horizon—a stronger dollar
—Fortune Explains: Tariffs and trade wars
Catch up with Data Sheet, Fortune's daily digest on the business of tech.


Established in 2009, We provide customers with an unmatched cannabis product – grown the US with state-regulated facilities at indoor locations, using a customized process that combines food-grade nutrients and a unique soil mix that brings out the plant's best features.
Close attention is paid to product cleanliness, quality, curing and processing. Our grow operations are not only environmentally-friendly, but also ensure that all strains of Medical Weed Online marijuana are grown in a strictly controlled atmosphere; away from man-man and natural contaminants, with the cleanest possible water. That unique moisture system also flushes the plant with pure water in the last week before harvesting.
We prides ourselves on being an industry pioneer, with a commitment to the future of the regulated, legal cannabis industry, while paying close attention to our consumers' needs. Since the January 1, 2014 start of legalized sales of recreational cannabis to adults, We have provided high-quality marijuana flowers to tens of thousands of customers from over 100 countries.
And we pride ourselves on always remembering the spirit of compassion and enjoyment that good cannabis can bring to nearly any occasion. That's why we're kind, man.